Information & Ethics committee  In response to your first question, the frivolous and vexatious provision, as it's applied by the courts and in other jurisdictions where they have this type of legislation, requires bad faith. These are not instances where the media or individuals are making requests for information that is important.

Information & Ethics committee  First of all, I don't think there's another jurisdiction in Canada that restrains the right of access to anyone who has to be a resident or residing in Canada. Even as it is now, it's not just Canadian citizens; it's just someone who happens to be here at the moment. I think there's awkwardness in applying the access to information scheme if we ask people why they want it, if they want it for commercial or personal purposes, or if they're a Canadian citizen.

Information & Ethics committee  It's under the frivolous and vexatious provision, so it's rarely used. It's not just based on the fact that someone made a hundred requests. They may have made a hundred perfectly legitimate requests for different records because they were very interested.

Information & Ethics committee  I think we're saying here with these quick fixes that we're supporting the CBA's recommendation on recommendation 1 to open it and take out the residency requirement, which is being avoided anyway through using third parties and so forth. But at the same time, we're supporting a review of the act in five years because of the very things you're suggesting.

Information & Ethics committee  I guess the idea of this particular one is that they would have to respond within 60 days and they would have to actually take an affirmative step in order to get permission to go beyond there, which they don't have to do right now. Right now, it's just sort of in limbo. I agree with you that there are other mechanisms one could use in order to ensure that departments respond in a reasonable time.

Information & Ethics committee  I think it might be worth exploring other options in addition to these things that might achieve the goal, in the end, of getting a quick response.

Information & Ethics committee  I think that could be said about anything that you say a commissioner might do. I don't think there's an implication that would be the case. If you look at the rationale that we have suggested here for why he would not, it's the same as the ones under PIPEDA. The same could be said of anyone, like the Privacy Commissioner, etc.

Information & Ethics committee  They are significant, and in particular, subsection 4.(2.1), which requires there to be assistance provided to requesters. There are a number of them, but they aren't a comprehensive review of the legislation. It did extend to 67 more crown agencies, which is very good, but it also had a lot of exemptions in there for those particular ones.

Information & Ethics committee  I think it's laudable, the amendments that have been made and extending the access regime to a whole host of other entities that get public funding and so forth. But even these recommendations do not touch on a wholesale review of the legislation. The purpose of recommendation number one is to ensure that the very good things that have been done here--in the last three years, for example--can be reviewed.

Information & Ethics committee  We see number 11 a little differently, as I've indicated. We don't think that is the way to go in terms of direct. I read the honourable minister's comments, and if you say to people that they can go to the federal court in order to get justice.... I guess we're saying that it would be better if the commissioner had the tools to expeditiously resolve complaints, as was intended.

Information & Ethics committee  In most jurisdictions the commissioner has the power, at least in respect of frivolous and vexatious, as does the court. It's not abused. As far as I can see, it's very judiciously dealt with. But it is useful, because there are individuals who would try to monopolize the system and overwhelm it.

Information & Ethics committee  Well, ”trivial” is used, yes, from time to time.

Information & Ethics committee  No.

Information & Ethics committee  We have experience in Ontario where our commissioner in Ontario has had to deal with situations--not frequently--where somebody is asking for the same record over and over again and it is overwhelming the system, because they have to go and get it and they have to process it. One of the things that has been done about these individuals is to say they can make two requests in a certain period, which is hard to manage, but at least they've been told.

Information & Ethics committee  No. I think you have to look at the numbers. I'm very familiar with Ontario. I've worked in that system for 20 years, and I can tell you that there are very few judicial reviews relative to the number of decisions the commissioner makes. In Ontario, the commissioner makes about 40 decisions a month.